Alternative Schools --- How Long Can They Survive?

Despite many words to the contrary, Chief Academic Carla Santoro and Superintendent Maria Goodloe-Johnson are destroying what is special about alternative schools in the pursuit of the almighty WASL scores.

For example, all the alternative schools in the district are being forced to use the standard elementary school math curriculum, Everyday Mathematics. And more standardized curriculum decisions will be coming soon.

If our schools can't use alternative curriculum, then what is going to keep them "alternative"? How can a school that has multi-grade classrooms use a curriculum that requires kids to be separated strictly by grade? How can a school that believes in highly differentiated, theme-based, contextual instruction follow a curriculum where the math concepts are covered rapidly at a shallow level with no connection to other classroom work?

What happens to kids that are used to being able to go as fast and as far as they can in their learning when everyone now has to go at the same speed? And even worse, what about those who can't keep up with the pace and feel like failures in math now. Previously, those kids felt successful as long as they were learning, pushing themselves, setting goals and meeting them. But standardized curriculums with pacing guides reward only speed in learning, not creativity or exploration.

Of course not all schools in the district are forced to use the Everyday Math curriculum. If you have high enough WASL scores, your school can be exempted from having to use this curriculum, like North Beach and others have been.

Never mind that WASL scores are highly correlated with income and mother's level of education. Never mind that schools in certain locations of the city could have high WASL scores no matter what and how they teach. And others won't no matter what they do.

Never mind that not all parents or teachers think that high WASL scores are more important than love of learning, a sense of community, and a connection to the world around us.

We have alternative schools in Seattle to meet the needs of children and families whose needs aren't met by traditional schools.

Why do Carla and Maria want to turn them into traditional schools?

***********

If you are interested in joining together to discuss what is happening to alternative schools in Seattle, please send an e-mail to SeattleAlternativeSchools@yahoogroups.com.

Parents and teachers from alternative schools, as well as any parents, teachers or other community members interested in keeping viable alternative schools in our district are invited to join.

Comments

anonymous said…
Some alternative schools seem to be popular and thriving, some just seem to hang on, and some appear to be failing miserable.

I believe that alternative schools should have some flexibility of curriculum, that's part of what makes them alternative. But I think that alternative school children should have to perform to the same standards on the WASL, as the children who attend traditional schools. It is a standardized test used to determine if a child is being taught what is expected at his/her grade level, and no matter what curriculum you use to get there, you must be able to get there.

Parents want a school that performs well. Proof of this is the long wait lists at Salmon Bay and TOPS, two very high performing alternative schools. Parents do not want under performing schools. Proof of this is the severely declining enrollment of Summit, and AS1 which has class sizes of 14 or 15, and plenty of available seats.

The bottom line is that alternative schools need to teach the EALRs and GLEs just like every other school. How they teach it should be left up to them, as long as they do teach it, and teach it well enough for their students to perform as well as the rest of the district on the WASL.

Schools like AS1 who say they are fundamentally opposed to the WASL are shooting themselves in the foot. It is their chance to show the district that they are performing as expected, but instead they refuse to participate. The perception by families and the district when they see their abysmal WASL scores is that they are a failing school. Nobody really knows how AS1 is doing, and not many families are willing to send their kids to a school with a ? for performance. Even families who value alternative education.

Schools that are bombing the WASL year after year, like AS1 and Summit need intervention, and these schools SHOULD loose their autonomy and choice of curriculum.

On the other hand high performing schools like TOPS and Salmon Bay should have more flexibility in their curriculum choice as long as their performance continues to warrants it. Just like North Beach.
Jet City mom said…
We found that the program at a traditional high school, was actually more flexible, more responsive to our students/family's needs, with less effort and energy on our part, than the alternative school where we had been heavily involved for six years.

Classrooms that seem to spend more energy and time fighting standards and accountability are not places that provide students with the tools to be successful

We can't continue to watch our district throwing good money after bad.

Alternative schooling can be successful and should be supported, but we need continuity, comprehensiveness and accountability.
Charlie Mas said…
There is great confusion between the terms "curriculum", "materials", "Standards" and "Grade Level Expectations".

Over and over again, when well-informed members of the District Staff speak clearly and intentionally, they say that a curriculum is a set of knowledge and skills that students are supposed to acquire. For example, by the end of the third grade, students are expected to be able to explain the meaning of a remainder in a division problem.

The State Grade Level Expectations (GLEs) are a specific set of knowledge and skills that students are expected to attain and the State GLEs could be adopted as a curriculum. Districts may, however, adopt more rigorous expectations than the State guidelines.

If every school in the district adopts a standardized curriculum then every class is expected to teach the same set of knowledge and skills. This is useful because it will mean that each student coming into a class can be relied upon to have learned the knowledge and skills expected for the previous grade. This does NOT mean that every class is expected to teach the same lessons, teach the lessons in the same order or pacing, or use the same materials. In addition, it does not mean that teachers are prohibited from teaching more than the standard curriculum. Teachers are expected to support students working beyond the grade level expectations, even if that means the acquisition of knowledge and skills that are part of a later grade's curriculum. The curriculum - even a standardized curriculum - is supposed to be a floor, not a ceiling.

Everyday Math, is not a curriculum, it is materials. Schools can adhere to the district standard curriculum without using Everyday Math, and certainly without using the district guideline order and pacing.

It is lazy and incorrect to speak of Everyday Math as a curriculum. References to Everyday Math as if it were a curriculum spreads misinformation and confusion. Please don't do it yourself and please correct others when they do it - even if the people who do it are teachers, principals, or district administrators.

Alternative schools, in fact any school or teacher, should be free to use whatever materials they find effective - so long as they cover the District's adopted curriculum.

I fear that the District is intentionally blurring the line between curriculum and materials in an effort to deceive people into thinking that they are somehow required to use one set of materials. This is not the case and people should not be deceived.

On another topic, I reject the idea that students from low-income homes or students with mothers with low educational attainment are somehow incapable of passing the WASL at rates similar to other students. All students are capable of achieving the state grade level expectations. It requires more work with some students, and it requires different approaches with some students, but, more than anything else, it requires teachers, administrators, students, and families to set high expectations and to maintain them.
anonymous said…
DEFINITION OF CURRICULUM:
A series of planned instruction that is coordinated and articulated in a manner designed to result in the achievement by students of specific knowledge and skills and the application of this knowledge.

I think this definition could be appropriately used in reference to the state GLEs and EALRs, but it can also be used in reference to Everyday Math. In fact Everyday Math defines itself as a curriculum, as you will find on the University of Chicago's website (they are the makers of Everyday Math).

"Everyday Mathematics is a comprehensive pre-kindergarten through 6th grade mathematics curriculum developed by the University of Chicago School Mathematics Project, and published by Wright GroupMcGraw-Hill."

http://everydaymath.uchicago.edu/
Beth Bakeman said…
Ralph, my beliefs about the WASL do not match yours. Perhaps that is why I send my children to an alternative school. I do not believe it is a good assessment of what children should know at each grade level. And the link between the WASL and the EALR's is tentative at best. Even if you believe the WASL effectively measures student progress on the EALRs (which I don't), there is the simple fact that the WASL doesn't assess progress towards communication, social studies, arts or health and fitness EALRs and so (surprise, surprise) schools are putting less focus on those topics these days.

How can anyone have strong faith in the validity of the WASL when, for example, pass rates at our school for math went from 72.7% in 3rd grade to 37.8% in 4th grade? What possible meaningful data can that be providing?

Yes, all parents want a school that "performs well." It's just that some of us don't believe the WASL is an effective or even relevant performance measure. And back when Carla was new to the district and again when Maria was new to the district, they both swore they understood that the WASL, by itself, does not give a complete and balanced measure of student learning.

There should be room in our districts for schools who don't aim all their work at achieving high WASL scores. Our kids statewide are paying a price for the obsessive focus on those standardized test scores in terms of what is being cut out of schools in search of the almighty higher WASL score (And believe me, this is as true on Bainbridge Island as it is in Seattle where the district cut a popular curriculum unit where students interviewed residents who had been in the Japanese internment camps during World War II because it wasn't linked to WASL scores!)

I believe alternative schools should be judged in part by enrollment numbers. These are schools that parents have to opt to send their children to. No children are assigned to these schools. So if parents who don't value WASL scores opt to send their children to these schools because they value the other things that are being taught and the community that exists at the school, why should the district try to force all schools to be the same?

Charlie writes, "I fear that the District is intentionally blurring the line between curriculum and materials in an effort to deceive people into thinking that they are somehow required to use one set of materials. This is not the case and people should not be deceived."

That is not what our school has been told. We have been told we have no choice about whether or not to teach Everyday Math, even if it forces our school to teach in ways that are in direct conflict with our educational philosophy.

My kids' school is full of amazingly talented, dedicated teachers who make a difference in the lives of the kids they teach. Older students regularly come back to visit and say hi to their teachers because of the strength of the community and the connections they made while at the school. Our school cannot be labeled as "failing" by any stretch of the imagination.

But our multi-grade classrooms are now forced to split up for one hour a day to be taught in a very traditional way that kids aren't used to and parents haven't chosen. Not to mention the fact that we don't actually have adequate staffing to do this. With three 2/3 teachers and three 4/5 teachers, splitting into grade levels for math instruction means our Assistant Principal has to teach math for two hours a day and finish the rest of her work in the evenings and on weekends.

And finally, Charlie, while I completely agree that "All students are capable of achieving the state grade level expectations" that isn't happening in our district for all sorts of reasons other than "expectations" and you know it.

I'll also do some research on the nationwide correlations between income, mother's level of education and standardized test scores and post them on this blog. This correlation between test scores and socio-economic status is a fact that we have to acknowledge and figure out how to change, not just wish away.
SS said…
I sympathise with Beth's concerns- until the WASL dissappears, alternative schools are stuck in a very difficult situation and it seems the "alternative" is slowly eroding away.

My two kids went though K-5 in alternative schools which was a fantastic experience for them, except for math. They did great in class, but the older they got, the more gaps they had. By the time they finished 5th grade I had to buy both 4th and 5th grade workbooks to use all summer before they started middle school. They just did not have enough practice in basic concepts such as working with fractions.

I agree with Ralph in that successful schools (alternative or not) should be allowed their autonomy to keep what system works for them, but any school that cannot perform, especially doing poorly in math, needs to shift gears and try a new approach. Otherwise, the students are not prepared for the road ahead.
anonymous said…
Beth says "I do not believe it (the WASL) is a good assessment of what children should know at each grade level. "

Actually Beth, you and I are not that far apart of what we think of the WASL. In fact many families (alternative and traditional) don't think the WASL is a good assessment. But most of us acknowledge that at this point it's all we have. It is THE ONLY WAY, that a parent can know how a school is performing academically. Everything else that a school tells you or shows you on a tour is hearsay, and many of us are not satisfied with a spiel or heresay. Without the WASL a parent would have to simply buy that a school is doing what they say they are doing. So yes, lets fight to change the WASL to a more relevant, meaningful assessment - I will too. But until that happens, the WASL is all we have.

Then Beth says "the WASL, by itself, does not give a complete and balanced measure of student learning."

No it doesn't, but it is our only major tool right now. There is also teacher evaluation, report cards, and the alternative forms of assessments (portfolio etc) that 10th graders can use.

"I believe alternative schools should be judged in part by enrollment numbers. "

Are you serious here, Beth? You don't think academics should be part of a schools assessment at all? Even if you don't like the WASL, do you really believe that a school should avoid all or any form of academic accountability? And, even if Pathfinder is doing it's job academically which they very well may be, without any form of assessment there would be no way to know if another school was doing it's job. What if we had a doll making school, that only taught children how to make beautiful dolls? No academics - no math, no science, no SS, no English. Just doll making. That would be OK under your idea as long as enough families were interested in shunning all academics for doll making?

I believe that while successful schools should have some freedom to choose what materials they are going to use to teach, a school should NOT have the freedom to choose WHAT they are going to teach. I think schools MUST follow the EALRs and GLEs, and to make sure that is happening, there must be some form of academic assessment. What Beth suggests is that alternative schools should not be held accountable in the academic arena. Even if a parent finds this acceptable, it is a huge disservice to children.

Like SS, my child went to an alternative school for elementary so I know first hand how difficult the aftermath of a school that does not hold academics as a priority can be for a child. We experienced huge holes in academics. In turn we had to have a lot of tutoring (formal and at home) to fill in the gaps. We had a child that had not learned division or fractions by the end of fifth grade, and in fact barely worked on the times table. A child that did tons of creative writing, but was never taught proper conventions, grammar or punctuation. Did not know to capitalize the first letter in a sentence, or indent a the first sentence of a paragraph. A teacher who chose to do a play instead of flash (the district sex ed curriculum), and another teacher that decided she didn't have time to teach cursive and that kids "really didn't use cursive any more anyway". The basics were never taught, and my child has had a high price to pay for it. It was difficult to catch up in middle school. As I said this is a disservice to the children.

All schools, including alternative schools should be held accountable to teach what the state expects of them.
hschinske said…
"And believe me, this is as true on Bainbridge Island as it is in Seattle where the district cut a popular curriculum unit where students interviewed residents who had been in the Japanese internment camps during World War II because it wasn't linked to WASL scores!"

Wow. I remember doing a unit on the Japanese internment camps in seventh grade. At that time we had one teacher who had been born in the camps (Gary Higashi), and one whose name I'm sorry I can't remember who was old enough to remember them. Honestly, it was the ONLY worthwhile part of that year academically (okay, apart from the SRA math I taught myself, and the journal I kept for language arts, which was also essentially teaching myself).

Helen Schinske
Jet City mom said…
My daughter attended Summit from 3rd through 8th grade, I was very involved in the school, including a parent chair position. She did not pass the WASL while she was @ Summit although I did not request to see the tests as since I have poor visual memory, I realized that not being able to take notes would have made it waste of time if my objective was to learn something to help my child.

We chose Summit because they offered the opportunty to have mixed grade classes and the continuity to have the same classroom for more than a year.
. Ironically, despite protests, she was assigned a single grade classroom ( each year) for 3rd through 6th grade.
The refusal of the administration to respond to our familys requests, in spite of documentation that indicated she would be more successful in a mixed class environment was painful.

The middle school which consists of 7th & 8th grade, is team taught- and each student has a core teacher for LA/SS, so she was able to somewhat finally have mixed grades in middle school.

Despite our commitment to the school & to the community, she changed schools after 8th grade, to a school that was more than twice as large- not an alternative school.

The placement test for math, indicated she was more than two years behind grade level, despite taking math as much as offered, despite outside tutoring ( which we could ill afford) and despite never having received lower than a B in math while at Summit.

Her high school Garfield, had a program to help support students in math and writing skills which she took first semester. Teachers also stayed after school and during lunch to help with courses including math. With the completion of one summer school math course after completing an accelerated math course designed to help students catch up to grade level, she completed 4 years of math in 2 years, and was at grade level math entering junior year. Her motivation was to be able to take chemistry junior year, which she did, earning an A.

While she did not pass the math portion of the WASL in 10th grade, she did pass the other sections & when retaking the math WASL in 11th grade as part of the Pathfinder program- she passed with high scores.

I think the WASL is an expensive poorly administered and managed test. But it is what we have- and we have had it for 10 years, plenty of time to realize it is not going away soon.

Testing is required to apply for college, to apply for jobs. You really can't get away from paperwork in this life unfortunately, and part of our charge regarding childrens education IMO, is to teach them to be able to take appropriate tests as needed so their options are not limited, as I feared my daughters options would have been limited had she stayed at Summit.

Ironic eh?

There are students who do well at Summit, particularly if their parents are educated and able to provide them with outside learning opportunities and support. However, I admit I feel pretty bitter about the way we were treated by the administration- and while I have been attending meetings to keep Summit open since 1987- and that I still value the potential of a K-12 school, I think that perhaps completely throwing it out & starting over- including having new staff apply is worth considering.
anonymous said…
"Yes, all parents want a school that "performs well." It's just that some of us don't believe the WASL is an effective or even relevant performance measure."

So, Beth, what would you use as a relevant ACADEMIC performance measure? Please don't say enrollment numbers as that does not assess academics. What would you use to assess academics?
anonymous said…
"why should the district try to force all schools to be the same?"

All schools should not "be the same", but they should all be responsible to meet state standards and benchmarks for each grade level. And, the only way to know if a school is meeting standards is some form of assessment.
anonymous said…
"But our multi-grade classrooms are now forced to split up for one hour a day to be taught in a very traditional way that kids aren't used to and parents haven't chosen."

The alternative methods that Pathfinder was using did not work last year. As you stated your math WASL pass rate was 38%. When you are not performing intervention is absolutely necessary. When you perform like North Beach, Bryant etc do, then you have more freedom to choose your own curriculum.

Why can't an alternative philosophy of hands on learning, exploration and community, co-exist with strong academics? Are some of them not able to achieve this? Why are they so opposed to evaluation and assessment? What are they afraid of?

Your child will have to take a test to get into college, tests to get a job. They will have to pass background checks, and credit checks. And once they get a job thir performance at work will constantly be assessed, and their pay raises and promotions will be based on that performance. It is a part of life.

What if the district decided that they didn't want to create and maintain a budget any longer? What if they were philosophically opposed to predetermining where all of the money was going to be spent up front? What if they didn't feel a budget was relevant to classroom learning? Would you accept that? Of course not. And neither should anybody accept alternative schools refusing to be assessed. AS1 advises their families to not come to school on WASL day. They encourage them to opt out of taking the WASL. What kind of example is that setting for our children? When you don't like a rule just break it? Refuse to do it? If you wish to truly do your children a service, teach them to work to change what they don't agree with in a constructive way.
Jet City mom said…
Our older child attended an elementary school that underwent self assessment supervised by a board of peer educators- if we had stability in teaching staff as well as administrators this could be an effective if expensive tool for public schools.

Students were not tested, except for spelling and math tests. Report cards were replaced by portfolios and explanatory conferences.

She underwent individual intelligence testing on several occasions, as part of a study at the UW- which indicated that her IQ was upward of 160.
This testing was used to qualify her for admission to the above school, after group administered testing through SPS found that she was not eligible for any enriched or gifted program. ( and after the neighborhood school advised us to enroll her elsewhere)

Her private middle school, assessed students using the ERB, which suburban districts also used at the time. ( results from this test in 6th grade made her eligible to take the SAT in 7th grade)

I haven't found group administered tests to be that helpful. SAT results are accessible online, including the essay- which is interesting- and certainly more helpful than the few bits of information received from the WASL- but it is overused as an assessment tool, although more colleges are now either refusing to consider test scores or accepting other measures & a recent study by NACAC recommends that instead of using the SAT/ACT for admission, colleges test subject knowledge.

I agree that all schools need to address the EARLS but they should have flexibility how to do so.
We have some of the most experienced educators in the region, we should not have to buy expensive curriculum or materials every few years for all schools.
There is no one size fits all, not for the classroom teachers, nor for their students.

We need extensive assessment of what is being done in the classroom- by peer educators who are familar with the district and the community.
If what one school or dept is doing is working- why make them stop- just so they can have the same procedures as every one else?

Math seems to be an easy subject to assess. There are certain skills that must be taught in order to move on, and depending on approach, higher mathematical concepts can be brought down to the lower grades as long as basic computation is not missed.
Some of the new- new- new math, does miss some basic stuff. Not teaching how to do long division for example, seems to be a huge blunder, but a thorough review of curriculum would have caught that.

Students need to build on what went before- it is a waste of time for them to go backward- unless they are using that opportunity to teach it to a student who has not had it before- the attraction of mixed grade class rooms was , not only would the teacher be more familar with the students and not have the wasted time at the beginning of the year, but students reinforce knowledge by working with younger students as well as be challenged as they worked alongside the older students.

However, in my daughters single grade classrooms at Summit- we were dismayed to see that while in 3rd grade she was learning to write research reports with an experienced teacher, in 4th grade they colored in worksheets and had few hands on materials.
If all the classrooms are teaching to the same level- and including the same information, even if presentation is varied- then students can move between schools and classrooms without penalty.

If the student is not ready for that level- then another program to support that challenge, as my daughter experienced at Garfield is appropriate- but still the main content should not be altered.
( when a student is ready for beyond that level, support for advanced study can be given as a separate program- as appropriate)

This could keep emphasis on evaluation of teaching skill and curriculum where it belongs, instead of penalizing the students for things that may be beyond their control.
Beth Bakeman said…
Frankie, I have so many things to say in response to your questions, but very little time. So for now, one important correction: opting out of the WASL is not breaking any rules or laws.

Check out the Mothers Against WASL site or even the state PTSA site for more info. It is absolutely within parents' legal rights to have their children opt out of the WASL. There is a standard form to use, and there is nothing wrong with doing it.
To touch on a few points;

-the WASL is not supposed to be everything as far as academics. The fact that some may perceive it to be the "only" academic measure of a school means the school or district is not doing its job. The district can't tell us it's not the only measure and then use it as the only measure. (Also, to be fair in judging a school, there is the issue of what student population challenges a school faces or if there is progression in WASL scores.)

So if parents don't want their kids to take the WASL, they are hurting the school and shooting themselves in the foot? I would disagree. If you believe the WASL is a flawed testing instrument or you believe too much time is taken from the classroom to give the test, then you should say no. It is one of the few ways to get OSPI to listen and make changes so more parents will support the goals of taking the WASL. It is also a parent's legal right.

Also, we used to use the ITBS which was the gold standard of tests (although it is norm-based as opposed to the WASL) and only cost $3 per student compared with the %52-$72 per student cost of the WASL). It was interesting how different the ITBS scores could be from WASL scores.

AS#1 used to (and may still use) a portfolio system to show parents progress. Parents could easily understand it because they knew their child. That's why some parents did choose AS#1.

I personally do believe you can learn a lot about whether a school has a good academic focus and not just from WASL scores. (If WASL scores were all that counted, why go visit the school?) When you walk through the school, what evidence do you see of higher level thinking and work? Does the school sponsor family events based on math or science or reading? Are there public speaking opportunities for students?

Based on a lot of years of being active in this district, I do admit to some mixed feelings about alternative schools.

Past Boards allowed them to develop in a haphazard manner and placed them whereever they sprang up (and also moved them at will). There did not seem to be a real plan or even forethought like "What is the need for this school and what population might it serve?"

As a result we have a very uneven distribution of alternative schools. This will be a challenge during discussions about the assignment plan because if parents are restricted to one region, well, each region has a different number and type of alternatives available.

As we see from the squeeze in the NE and NW about capacity, many people believe conventional schools (regular ed) come first and there is a feeling that if any alternative is not vastly popular and/or "successful", it should go.

But alternatives serve a useful purpose and can be a lifesaver for kids who do not learn in a traditional way. (I would put forth that Nova High School actually saves lives because of its small, non-judgmental way.)

It can be difficult to judge how successful an alternative is because of the wide spectrum of schools. To me there are some non-traditional schools labeled alternative (TOPS) and schools that are truly alternative (AS#1). Then there are schools that really are non-traditional like JSIS and New School but are not considered alternative.

Also, the district allowed them to become a reality and then let a lot of them just get by without much district support. Many of these schools were just grateful for their existence and didn't complain. But, for example, how do you judge Summit? It used to be centrally located and it made a lot of sense for an all-city draw. But when you move that school to a far north location, what did the district expect to happen? (If you go back in history far enough, the space that TOPS occupies had been originally promised to Summit. But somehow that didn't work out.)So Summit has plodded along and now the district needs their space so what to do?

In the end, I believe that we still probably have too many underenrolled schools and it's costing us money and resources. Maybe someone will have to do the politically-charged thing of examining the alternative schools and closing a couple that may have outlived their mission. But the district has to support the alternative schools just as they do regular ed.
Maureen said…
I think the assignment plan should be changed so that people who chose alternative schools 1st have an advantage over those who chose them 2nd, 3rd.... This would increase the percentage of families at alt schools who are actually there because they value the school's mission and vision and decrease the percent that are there just because they drew a better lottery number.

This will strenghthen the alt schools' ability to support their missions and visions and decrease the pressure some of them face to be a version of a good reference school. My hope is that this will help them survive in a form that is worth preserving.

I think that schools that can't attract enough families (I would say that every alt school should have a wait list for their entry grades at least every other year over five years) should be closed or combined in a building with a traditional program.

The alt schools were created by communities that valued them. If those communities no longer support them, the schools should no longer exist. That said, there should be a way to create new alt schools and those communities should be given the first shot at buildings that formerly housed alt schools.
zb said…
The statement that testing success is correlated with income does not mean that you don't think that low income students cannot do well or learn. It means that when you assess a school or teaching methodology by testing, if you have not corrected for socioeconomics, you are not really assessing teaching quality. TOPS performs well because it has relatively high socioeconomics, comparable to the other non-alternative high-achieving schools. It may have good teaching methodology, but comparing its tests against Summit (which has a very different demographic) does not tell us that TOPS methods are better.

Parents don't use this more complicated assessment, though.
Jet City mom said…
TOPS performs well because it has relatively high socioeconomics,

And my daughter performed better at Garfield than she did at Summit because of higher socioeconomics?

Which brings up a question I have asked before.
If some schools have barriers to student success because of economics in their community, why do we not make an attempt to have socioeconomic diversity in schools?
hschinske said…
"And my daughter performed better at Garfield than she did at Summit because of higher socioeconomics?"

No -- she performed better because at Garfield she had access to appropriate remedial instruction (moving on to non-remedial when needed).

I've seen a lot of kids in high-scoring schools flounder for want of proper instruction. The fact that Garfield didn't let your kid fall through the cracks doesn't mean that another high-scoring school wouldn't have.

Helen Schinske
anonymous said…
Have a look at The New School and you will see that minority and low income students can and will perform as well as students of white and/or higher socio economic backgrounds with sufficient support.

Then have a look at Maple and Beacon Hill elementary schools and you will see that even without the extra financial support, with high expectations, commitment, and strong leadership a school can achieve high performance with low income and minority families.

Saying a school doesn't perform well based on socio economic status alone is an excuse.

Just for curiosity, I'd like to know how minority and low income students at TOPS perform? Is there an achievement gap at TOPS? And if so how big is it?
Jet City mom said…
and why didn't she have appropriate remedial instruction at Summit?

As a student in SPED- the school received three buckets of money for her education.
One that every student gets.
One from Federal govt under IDEA &
One from the state.
Unfortunately, the hour a day that she was supposedly served with those dollars consisted of watching other kids work on diagraming sentences.

Why was it that at Garfield, AFTER she was removed from SPED ( by me- when I could not get help from teacher/school/district @ Summit), so that the school didn't recieve any extra money to address her needs, that she actually started to make progress?

One reason could have been that at Garfield unlike Summit, they didn't automatically assume that because she was white- she was going to be OK, despite evidence that indicated otherwise.
Incidentally- why she attended Garfield instead of another school was because Garfield encourages students to challenge themselves, even if there are areas where they are getting remedial help.
She attended AP classes, with some of the same students in her remedial course. I have heard that other schools may not permit students to attempt above grade level work if they are below grade level in other areas.
Pity.

IMO, the reason why Garfield is high scoring isn't because of socio economics, but because they hold themselves and students accountable for their words and actions.
anonymous said…
It is apparent that Summit is not doing it's job. It didn't do it's job for classof75's daughter, and it is not doing it's job for all of it's students who can't pass the WASL. Summit is not one of the "opt out of the WASL" schools, so their test scores are a true reflection of their sub par academics.

Whether you value the WASL or think it stinks, it's a standardized test, and it's what we have. Many schools are able to get high WASL scores, and have strong drama, music, art and electives (like View Ridge, Bryant, TOPS, Eckstein, Ballard, Roosevelt, etc)

The district should intervene at struggling, failing schools like Summit. They should not stand by and watch their declining enrollment yet another year. They should not stand by and allow them to fail their remaining students for yet another year.

Luckily, classof75 was able to recognize what was happening and get her child to a better school/situation. Other parents, especially low income, ESL and minority families don't catch it. And they are the children that suffer the aftermath of these under performing schools. It is a tragedy.
-No one really knows for sure how much opting out occurs at any given school so to say Summit isn't an "opt out" school may not be accurate. AS#1 is one of the few to actively let parents know they don't have to take the WASL.
-The WASL is all we have? I gave examples of what parents can look for at a school beyond the WASL and again I say, why bother visiting if all you care about is a WASL score? The history of our country is to stand up against policies we believe are wrong or hurtful. If we accept that the WASL is all we have, then why bother to try to make it any better? Why did Superintendent Bergeson take the math WASL off the table (she didn't in reality but that's the general belief)? If standardized test is the be all, then why are colleges and universities starting to reject the SAT and ACT?
-I'm confused about the correlation between high WASL schools and having electives.
anonymous said…
Argue as you will Melissa - You know what I meant. Summit does not actively encourage parents to opt out of the WASL. It is not against the schools philosophy as it is at AS1. Sure a few Summit families opt out, but so do they for every school in the district. Summit's WASL scores are reflective of their achievement. It is you by the way, who mentioned in an earlier post that we shouldn't go by WASL scores for Summit as MANY of their families opt out. But at least now you acknowledge that nobody knows how many, if any, do opt out.

Then Melissa asks why bother visiting a school if all you care about is their WASL scores. I'm happy to answer. I first start my search on paper, narrowing down schools that are achieving well based on their WASL scores (as I said it's all I have to go on achievement wise at this point). My second step is to look for all of the other things that would make a school "great" for my child - foreign language, band, range of electives, sports, community. After that I go to visit the schools that made my short list to see which ones "feel" right. Schools with low WASL scores don't make the list, so I DON'T tour them. You obviously place some value on the WASL and high performance yourself, since your kids went to two of the highest performing schools in the district (Eckstein and Roosevelt).

And then you say we should stand up and fight the things we don't believe in. I don't like the WASL, and I have been active in trying to change it to a more relevant test. I do, however, believe that standardized tests serve their purpose and should remain one of the tools that our state uses. Standardized tests have been around since we were kids and they are a great tool to see how a school, a district and a state are doing compared to other schools, districts and states. I do not however, think they should be used to see how a particular child is doing.

And you ask why did Bergeson take the math WASL off the table. That's a simple one, because not enough kids were passing it, and many would not graduate. She would have to admit that WA schools are not doing their jobs or that the test was flawed. Either way she would have a huge problem, so it was easier for her to just take it off the table. Did you know that when a high school student gets an F for a class they don't recieve credit for the course but the grade does not get factored into their GPA. Isn't that absurd? Fake GPAs. Why do you think the district does that? It's that dumbing down thing. Lowering the bar - so more kids can get the 2.0 GPA needed to graduate, and Seattle Schools don't have to fix the problem.
anonymous said…
With all due respect Melissa, the two examples that you gave of what parents can look for beyond WASL scores either don't exist or do not give a complete picture.

Your first example, the ITBS, is no longer used by this district, so at this point it is not an instrument that we can use. And by the way the ITBS is a standardized test too. Are we opposed to standardized testing in general, or just the WASL?

Portfolio's are a great way for a parent to assess their child's progress once enrolled at a school, but how can a parent check to see how a school has been performing before sending their child there? What statistical or historical information can a portfolio offer? Portfolio's do not show if a school is performing at the same standards that other schools are performing at, or other districts, or other states. They don't show if a school is improving or declining? I love the idea of portfolios, I think they are a much more close and personal way to assess the work that your child is doing! But, they should be used in addition to, not instead of standardized test.
"It is you by the way, who mentioned in an earlier post that we shouldn't go by WASL scores for Summit as MANY of their families opt out."

Could you find this post for me? It not in this thread and I don't remember ever saying "many" of their families opt out. I don't even have that information about Summit.

I chose those schools because they are the schools closest to my home (and my older son didn't go to Roosevelt so we have made different choices), because it was where my son's friends were and yes, because they are good schools. (And since you brought up where my children go/went to school, where do your children go to school?)

The district has just changed that issue of F's on GPA. This information was just sent to all high school parents.

I used the ITBS as an example. It was used together with the WASL in the early years of WASL.

I am not opposed to standardized testing but the WASL, its cost and the length of time to give it hurt our children. I have advocated, repeatedly, for ONE national test so that if we are really trying to know how American schoolchildren are doing, we would have one test. One test would allow us that as well as take money out of the hands of the companies who create and score these tests and put that money back into the classroom where it belongs.
anonymous said…
Here's your quote Melissa, posted by melbrook on the Chalkboard blog, yes we can thread:

"Also, about Summit's WASL scores - many alternative schools have lower rates on the WASL because fewer students take them "

"I chose those schools because they are closest to my home". You chose
Roosevelt, Eckstein and Hale. Well Summit is just across the street from Hale - why didn't you choose Summit? How about Hamilton? It's pretty close too? Why didn't you choose Hamilton? Probably, at least in part, because both of those schools are low performing, and you did what most other concerned parents do - which is avoid them. So, please don't patronize people who want the same high quality schools that you sought for your children.

My children go to Bryant and Eckstein. I chose Eckstein over Summit and Hamilton based on their WASL scores and environment/school climate. I chose Bryant over my reference school John Rogers based on WASL scores and access to so much enrichment and the arts. I absolutely use WASL scores as a primary judge of performance. And, it seems like you do too. It's nothing to be ashamed of.

And, I'll say again (and again). I like the ITBS. I like using different assessments. I would love a national standardized test. I advocate for these things every chance I get. What I said is that at this point the WASL is all we have. So I have no choice but to use it's data, even if not the most relevant.
anonymous said…
By the way Frankie and Honker 101 are both the same person (me) Frankie. My son logged into his google account (Honker101) and didn't log out. Sorry.
Not to belabor the point but you'll note the word "many" is nowhere in my quote.

Honker/Frankie, you don't know the schools we visited or about our children's needs. In short, you have no business trying to dissect the choices my husband and I made for our children.

I'm sorry if you don't like what I blog but if I understand Beth's purpose for this blog is it to share experiences and ideas and not to attack other people's choices.
anonymous said…
Melissa, you might want to look at your quote again....I spy the word many.

"Also, about Summit's WASL scores - many alternative schools have lower rates on the WASL because fewer students take them "

And nobody is attacking you. Rather, I felt it was you who was attacking my choice of using, and defending the use of the WASL, as a primary means of judging a schools academic quality.
Maureen said…
I just skimmed the last few posts, so maybe someone mentioned this but: are Summit's WASL scores really so awful that we can base this discussion on them? If you go to the OSPI site and compare schools, Summit's scores actually look reasonable compared to Broadview Thompson (which I picked because it's in the same general area, has a FRL rate in the same ballpark (47% vs Summit's 55%) and has a fairly diverse population like Summit) there are differences of course (BT has much more ESL). You can play the game endlessly by looking for schools with 'comparable' demographics and trying to see how 'well' a school is doing. I was there for too long last night trying to find a school that's comparable to TOPS in FRL (25%) and pop distribution (white 44%, ESL and Sped 10%) to respond to an earlier post. There really isn't such a school. I really wish SPS had retained the 'value added' measure they used to have--it would be do useful in this type of discussion.

(Sorry for the format--I can't believe I spent as much time as I did on it!

Grade Subject BT Summit Seattle
3rd Reading 61.8% 74.1% 73.0%
3rd Math 59.6% 81.5% 73.4%

4th Reading 69.9% 73.3% 75.4%
4th Writing 50.5% 56.7% 62.9%
4th Math 57.3% 36.7% 56.3%

5th Reading 67.4% 71.8% 77.5%
5th Math 49.5% 41.0% 66.2%
5th Science 26.6% 15.4% 48.8%

6th Reading 59.4% 64.8% 70.9%
6th Math 45.3% 31.5% 51.4%

Summit's math sometimes looks iffy, but I can imagine that the EM lock-step thing might not fit the school very well. )
Jet City mom said…
what I am trying to get through is
I am not educated
( I didn't graduate from high school & my husband has never attended college)
we are not middle class.
We are blue collar & struggling but determined to give our kids a better start than we had & believe education is the way.
Isn't that the American way? Parents make sacrifices in order to give their kids a good start...
I appreciate the thought, but if I was that astute a parent , it wouldn't have taken until my child was entering high school, before she even began to reverse the thinking that made her feel that she wasn't capable, and there was a lot of blood, sweat and tears along the way.

No child should spend more time on their weaknesses than their strengths. When I first began involvement at Summit- there was choir, dance, foreign language, arts and drama all the way from the elementary school through the high school. Even weekly swimming.
I thought this was wonderful, because it gives students the opportunity to learn, without worrying about black/white, right/wrong answers.

But the cohort of parents, who had been involved with Summit since their children were in K, and teachers whose own kids had been in the classrooms, aged out and the school had difficulty keeping the momentum, particularly when the principal who had been there for I believe two decades retired, and the climate in the district had changed.
It was now more about test scores and taking the overflow from Eckstein .
When Summit began, there were few alternative programs, there were now more to choose from although they were not evenly spread throughout the district & Summit is the only one that is all-city.

Summit seemed to offer flexibility within structure, something that I think is useful for many students. Adults may be drawn to flexibility without structure as at AS# 1, but children need consistency and clear expectations, and our visit to AS#1 was chaotic to be polite.

What is Alternative?
You ask 100 people and you will get 100 different answers.
You ask 100 Seattlities and you will get 110 different answers.
Still, the same skills and material need to be covered in order for students to have the freedom to attend other schools in Washington without being penalized because their class didn't cover the same objectives.

Im not going to argue over which test we should be using to evaluate students. As I mentioned I think it is more appropriate to evaluate for the state/district to evaluate educators and curriculum and for the teachers to evaluate the students.


However- unless the state is going to opt out of accepting the federal money- as at least one state has done- then I think teachers should look at the evaluation format that their peers have apparently selected for our state & consider how their curriculum supports the EARLS.

Popular posts from this blog

Tuesday Open Thread

Breaking It Down: Where the District Might Close Schools

Education News Roundup